2012年6月28日 星期四

Harry Levinson, Psychologist for the Workplace,

Harry Levinson, Psychologist for the Workplace, Dies at 90


Harry Levinson, a psychologist who helped change corporate America’s thinking about the workplace by demonstrating a link between job conditions and emotional health — a progressive notion when he began developing his ideas in the 1950s — died on Tuesday in Delray Beach, Fla. He was 90.
Jim Bourg
Harry Levinson at his home, with a stylized sculpture of workers. He studied happy, productive workers and their bosses.
His death was confirmed by his son Marc.
As a management consultant and an educator at Harvard, M.I.T. and other universities, and through books, seminars and his own research institute, Dr. Levinson showed how psychoanalytical theories and methods could be used to motivate employees. He was among the first psychologists to postulate a connection between thwarted career aspirations and depression.
Many of his management theories are now practically truisms. But to the gray-flannel corporate culture of the postwar years, they were novel, compelling many managers to think beyond the traditional reward system of promotions and paychecks to motivate employees.
One of Dr. Levinson’s ideas, put forth in his book “The Exceptional Executive” (1968), held that companies must be “learning organizations” and that their leaders must be teachers. The concept was adopted and popularized decades later by John F. Welch Jr., the former General Electric chairman and one of corporate America’s most influential leaders.
Dr. Levinson argued that a psychological contract existed between employees and employers, laying out the expectations each had of the other. Employees who feel that their employers have violated that contract will feel depressed, he said, and may well become underachievers.
He envisioned an even more dire situation in which employees despair of ever reaching their full potential — in psychological parlance, when they face a wide gap between their self-image and their ego ideal. It did not matter if such discontented employees were reacting to workplace unfairness or to their own inherent insecurities, he said; in either case, they were likely to feel helpless and depressed, and thus be underproductive or even disruptive.
Dr. Levinson was an early promoter of the idea that companies, like people, had distinct personalities, or cultures, that grew out of their history and the demographics of their work force. He developed methods to identify and isolate the elements of a company’s culture and discern their impact on workers. His 1972 book on the subject, “Organizational Diagnosis,” has been used widely as a business school text.
But as adept as Dr. Levinson was at diagnosing and curing corporate ills, his main focus was on preventing them. His forte was identifying and promoting the habits and attitudes that kept people functioning well, and beginning in 1968 he built a lucrative business around it through the Levinson Institute, a research and consulting concern in Jaffrey, N.H.
Dr. Ralph G. Hirschowitz, a psychiatrist and former colleague of Dr. Levinson’s at the Harvard Medical School and later a faculty member at the institute, said, “When it came to applying psychoanalytic principles to managing human beings, Harry was a true missionary.”
Harry Levinson was born on Jan. 16, 1922, in Port Jervis, N.Y. He was the oldest of three children of David Levinson, a tailor, and the former Gussie Nudell Levinson, both Jewish immigrants from Russia. His mother never learned to speak English, but she did complain loudly — in Yiddish — about the family’s meager means, Dr. Levinson recalled.
“My teachers, not my parents, were the agents of my civilization,” he told a reporter.
The young Harry learned early on that books could be a wonderful escape from family strife and poverty. For hours he would sit in the local public library, or huddled by the coal stove at home, and read book after book.
“That’s what I remember vividly, Harry with his nose in a book,” Elizabeth Mungoven, a friend of Dr. Levinson’s since elementary school, said in 2005.
He loved writing. In seventh grade he won his first writing award, a silver medal (which he always kept) for an essay on President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was then in his first term.
Harry’s career goal as a teenager was to teach, but as a Jew in a time of virulent anti-Semitism, he believed his chances of landing a teaching job in New York State were slim. When a friendly high school guidance counselor persuaded him that he would do better in the Midwest, he enrolled in Kansas State Teachers College (now Emporia State University).
After receiving his bachelor of science degree in 1943, Dr. Levinson joined the wartime Army serving mostly in Italy, where he often tried to teach illiterate Army friends how to read. In 1946, he married his childhood sweetheart, Roberta Freiman, and then earned a master’s degree from Emporia State and a doctorate in clinical psychology from the University of Kansas.
As part of his doctoral studies, Dr. Levinson spent two weeks observing the way mentally ill patients were treated at the Topeka State Hospital in Kansas, then submitted a paper describing how their treatment could be improved. His ideas fell on receptive ears; the hospital hired him. He then spent more than three years instituting better ways of keeping track of patients, treating their ailments and raising the hospital’s profile with legislators and potential donors.
The young doctor’s methods were soon noticed by William C. Menninger, a co-founder of the Menninger Clinic in Topeka, which was renowned for innovative psychiatric methodologies. Dr. Menninger, whose clinic later moved to Houston, invited Dr. Levinson to join the clinic, and to shift his emphasis from curing sick people to helping well people stay well.
There Dr. Levinson seized on a theory that experiences at work were a visceral part of being well, and he began visiting corporations to see what they were doing to ensure the mental health of their employees. He was stunned to discover that few, if any, were paying attention to it.
“Psychoanalytic theory and whatever usefulness it might have for managing people was just unknown in industry,” Dr. Levinson recalled.
From then on, he devoted his career to filling that knowledge gap. In 1954 he created the Division of Industrial Mental Health at the Menninger Foundation and began developing seminars on how to apply psychoanalytic theory to leadership and management. He spent two years interviewing about 840 employees of the Kansas Power and Light Company to develop criteria for mental health in the workplace.
He looked for patterns in the ways the happiest, most productive employees interacted with their bosses and when he found them, he incorporated them into seminars and books. In 1968, Dr. Levinson moved to Cambridge, Mass., taught graduate classes at the Harvard Business School and became a professor of clinical psychology at the Harvard Medical School.
His career thrived at Harvard, but his marriage did not; he and his first wife were divorced in 1970. Twenty years later, he married Miriam Lewis, whom he had met on a blind date.
Dr. Levinson wrote or edited 16 books as well as numerous articles in The Harvard Business Review and other management publications. He was a visiting professor of both psychology and business at the Sloan School of Management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Kansas and Texas A&M University. For 14 years Dr. Levinson offered a seminar to second-year M.B.A. students at Harvard in which they spent a year “diagnosing” the problems of a local organization.
He ran the Levinson Institute until 1991, when he sold it to Dr. Gerald Krines. Macular degeneration began destroying Dr. Levinson’s eyesight in 2001, effectively ending his days of reading and writing.
Dr. Levinson had lived in Delray Beach since 1997. Besides his son Marc, he is survived by his wife as well as another son, Brian; two daughters, Kathy Levinson and Anne Levinson; and eight grandchildren.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 28, 2012

Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this obituary misidentified the person who theorized that experiences at work were a visceral part of “being well”, and who began visiting corporations to study their efforts to ensure their employees’ mental health. It was Dr. Levinson, not Dr. William C. Menninger.

2012年6月26日 星期二

Nora Ephron| 1941-2012:Writer and Filmmaker With a Genius for Humor

Nora Ephron’s Hollywood Ending
She refuted the fear that powerful women repel men, that funny girls go home to their cats, that having it all means being alone.
Nora Ephron | 1941-2012

Writer and Filmmaker With a Genius for Humor


Jonathan Wenk/Columbia Pictures

Nora Ephron on the set of her 2009 film, “Julie & Julia,” starring Ms. Streep, seated. More Photos »


諾拉·艾芙隆(Nora Ephron),一位桃樂絲·帕克(Dorothy Parker)式的(不過據一些人看來,艾芙隆要更聰明、更詼諧)散文家、幽默作家,是她那個時代最成功的劇作家和電影人,拍攝過幾部成功的浪漫喜劇,比如《西雅圖未眠夜》(Sleepless in Seattle)和《當哈利遇到莎莉》(When Harry Met Sally),周二晚她在曼哈頓去世,享年71歲。
她的兒子雅各布·伯恩斯坦(Jacob Bernstein)說,艾芙隆的死因是急性白血病引發的肺炎。
按圖放大
Librado Romero/The New York Times
1998年,諾拉·艾芙隆在上西區的老家。
1996年,艾芙隆在母校衛斯理大學(Wellesley College)畢業典禮致詞時曾回憶說,對她那個時代的女性,人們認為碌碌無為即是美德。但她卻從事了幾份不同的事業,每一份都取得了成功,而且有些是同時進行的。
她曾是記者、博客作者、散文家、小說家、劇作家,奧斯卡獎提名編劇,也是電影導演——在電影行業,導演這個位置無論是在過去,還是在現在,都被男性一統天下,她可謂是一個異數。她在後期取得票房成功的電影包括了《電子情書》(You've Got Mail)和《美味關係》(Julie & Julia)。在晚年時,雖然自己保養得相當年輕,不過在論及衰老和與之相伴的恥辱時,她更像是個哲學家。
“為什麼那些寫書的人總是念叨着,年長比年輕要好?” 她在2006年的暢銷散文集《我可憐的脖子》(I Feel Bad About My Neck)中寫道:“不可能啊!就算你擁有了睿智,可你還是想破腦袋都想不起來昨天碰到的那個人叫什麼名字。”
寫作是她的家族生意
諾拉·艾芙隆於1941年5月19日生於曼哈頓的上西區,是四姐妹中的長女,幾個女孩後來都成了作家。這並不讓人意外;寫作就是她們的家族生意。她的父親亨利和母親菲比(原名菲比·沃爾金德[Phoebe Wolkind])都是好萊塢的劇作家,寫過的作品包括《天上人間》(Carousel)、《娛樂世界》(There's No Business Like Show Business)和《紐曼軍醫》(Captain Newman, M.D.)。
“一切都是摹本,”她母親曾這樣說,而她和丈夫確實也證明了這一點,他們將大學時代的諾拉寫成一部戲劇中的角色,後來又編進電影《帶走她,她是我的》(Take Her, She's Mine)里。這個經驗對艾芙隆也同樣適用,她雖然幾乎從未寫過自己的子女,但卻可以對其他萬事萬物做出動人的描摹:爬上她脖頸的皺紋,她的公寓,白菜餡卷餅,特氟龍平底鍋,還有炒雞蛋白的寡淡無味。
她把與第二任丈夫、水門事件記者卡爾·伯恩斯坦(Carl Bernstein)痛苦的離婚寫成了暢銷小說《心痛》(Heartburn),之後又把它翻拍成了一部賣座電影,傑克·尼克爾森(Jack Nicholson)飾演花心的丈夫,梅麗爾·斯特里普(Meryl Streep)演繹的則是機智的艾芙隆本人。
艾芙隆四歲那年,她父母將家從紐約搬到比弗利山,她在那裡長大,1958年畢業於比弗利山高中。在馬薩諸塞州的衛斯理大學讀書時,她開始為校報撰 稿,1961年夏天,她去了肯尼迪(Kennedy)總統任內的白宮進行暑期實習。後來她說,在這期間自己最大的功績,大概要算當白宮發言人塞姆·雷伯恩 (Sam Rayburn)不小心將自己反鎖在男廁所時,她要把他解救出來。
在2003年為《紐約時報》寫的一篇隨筆中,她說,在所有白宮實習生中,自己也許是約翰·F.肯尼迪(John F. Kennedy)總統唯一沒有獻過殷勤的一位。
1962年大學畢業後,她移居紐約——這是她一直深愛的城市,決意成為一名記者。她的第一份工作是在《新聞周刊》(Newsweek)作信差(後來 她指出來,當時那兒沒有男人作信差)。不久,在同年《紐約郵報》(The New York Post)罷工期間,一幫人合辦了一份模仿該報的報紙,她參與了撰稿。她的稿件為她贏得了參加該報面試的機會,當時的出版人桃樂絲·希夫(Dorothy Schiff)說:“既然他們能模仿郵報,就能為這份報紙撰稿。把他們招進來!”
艾芙隆在郵報工作了五年,報道內容包括了披頭士樂隊(the Beatles)、美國自然歷史博物館“印度之星”藍寶石被搶劫事件,以及科尼島水族館裡的兩頭冠海豹拒絕交配。
“我在那裡的時候,郵報是份糟糕的報紙,”她曾寫道,不過她又補充說,這份經歷讓她學會了將文章寫短,以及圍繞報道對象外圍進行寫作,因為她採訪的那些人都不可能給她充分的採訪時間。
20世紀60年代末,艾芙隆轉戰雜誌,主要在《君子》(Esquire)和《紐約》(New York)雜誌工作。
很快她就因寫率真、詼諧的個人散文而小有名氣——比方說在文中,她會談到自己的平胸;此外她也寫文字尖刻、觀察細緻入微的人物特寫,報道對象包括 安·蘭德(Ayn Rand)、海倫·格蕾·布朗(Helen Gurley Brown)和作家兼暢銷詩人羅德·麥昆(Rod McKuen)。其中一些作品引發了爭議。在一篇文章中,她指責貝蒂·弗里丹(Betty Friedan)導演了一場與葛勞瑞婭·斯坦能(Gloria Steinem)之間“完全不可理喻”的爭端;而在另一篇文章中,她對《女裝日報》(Women's Wear Daily)的評價極盡諷刺之能事。
但她的文章以幽默和坦誠為特點,風格清晰、直接、低調,對於在什麼地方拋出妙語,她有種完美的分寸感(她的許多文章收錄在這三本合集中:《派對壁 花》[Wallflower at the Orgy]、《瘋狂沙拉》[Wallflower at the Orgy]和《潦草數筆》[Scribble Scribble])。
艾芙隆在挖苦自己時,跟挖苦旁人同樣不留情面。她被貼上了“新新聞主義”踐行者的標籤,認為是廣泛運用了小說的寫作技巧,挖掘到了更深刻的事實,但她一直抗拒這種聯繫。她曾寫道:“我不是新記者,不管這究竟是什麼勞什子。我只是坐在打字機前,一個勁兒地爬着舊格子。”
她是個“彪悍的人”
艾芙隆在1976年與伯恩斯坦結婚後,或多或少是在無意間進入了電影業。伯恩斯坦與合作進行水門事件調查的鮑伯·伍德沃德(Bob Woodward)合著了《總統班底》(All the President's Men)一書,兩人對威廉·戈德曼(William Goldman)改編的電影劇本不是很滿意,於是伯恩斯坦與艾芙隆想試試自己做改編。他們重寫的這個版本最終沒能用上,但她後來說,這是一次有益的學習經 歷,讓好萊塢的人注意到了她。她的第一部劇本是與朋友愛麗絲·阿倫(Alice Arlen)共同編寫的《絲克伍事件》(Silkwood),這部電影拍於1983年,根據凱倫·絲克伍(Karen Silkwood)的生平改編,絲克伍在調查自己工作的一家生產鈈的工廠危害公共安全事件時去世,死因可疑。
當時阿倫在讀電影學院,而艾芙隆除了給報刊寫過東西,沒有一點相關經驗。但該片(由梅麗爾·斯特里普和庫爾特·拉塞爾[Kurt Russell]聯袂出演)導演邁克·尼科爾斯(Mike Nichols)說,他一看這個本子,就留下了很好的印象。
1989年,導演羅伯·萊納將她的劇本《當哈利遇到莎莉》拍成電影,由比利·克里斯托(Billy Crystal)和梅格·瑞恩(Meg Ryan)主演,電影大獲成功。艾芙隆撰寫浪漫喜劇的天賦這才得到了公認,她善於安排一對明明是天作之合佳侶,卻懵懂不知,好事多磨終於有個大團圓結局。
她首次嘗試導演,是在1992年拍攝《這是我的生活》(This is My Life),劇本由她和妹妹迪莉婭(Delia)合寫,根據梅格·沃利茲(Meg Wolitzer)的小說改編,說的是一個單親媽媽努力想要成為脫口秀藝人的故事,這次嘗試並不成功。但在1993年艾芙隆憑藉著《西雅圖未眠夜》收復失 地(她也參與了編劇),因為這部劇中湯姆·漢克斯(Tom Hanks)和梅格·瑞恩的合作十分成功,在拍攝《電子情書》時,她再次請兩人出演。
艾芙隆參與編寫和導演的電影還包括《幸運數字》(Lucky Numbers,2000年)、《家有仙妻》(Bewitched,2005年)和最後一部電影《美味關係》(2009年),在該片中斯特里普飾演茱麗婭·柴爾德(Julia Child)。
在合作《絲克伍事件》時,她和斯特里普成為朋友。“諾拉無論是面對何種局面,總會揚起頭說,‘嗯,我怎麼才能把它弄得更有意思些?’”在周二發來的郵件中斯特里普這樣寫道。
艾芙隆分別因為電影《絲克伍事件》、《西雅圖未眠夜》和《當哈利遇到莎莉》,三次獲得奧斯卡最佳編劇獎提名,不過在從事電影生涯時,她也從未放棄過其他形式的寫作。她的兩部散文合集,《我可憐的脖子:以及其他身為女人的感想》(I Feel Bad About My Neck: And Other Reflections on Being a Woman,2006年)和《我什麼都記不住了》(I Remember Nothing,2010年),都是暢銷書。
幾年前,艾芙隆得知自己罹患骨髓增生異常綜合征,這是一種將轉歸為白血病的病症,但她把病情隱瞞了下來,繼續過着忙碌、交友廣闊的生活,只有幾個身邊人知道這個消息。
“她這人不喜歡抱怨,”作家薩莉·奎恩(Sally Quinn)在周二說道:“她不喜歡自怨自艾,總是把什麼事情都‘自己吞進肚裡’。”
艾芙隆與作家丹·格林伯格(Dan Greenburg)的第一段婚姻以離婚告終,與伯恩斯坦的婚姻同樣如此。1987年,她嫁給了尼古拉斯·派勒吉(Nicholas Pileggi),他是《盜亦有道》(Wiseguy)和《賭城風雲》(Casino)的作者。
艾芙隆的家人包括丈夫派勒吉;兩個兒子,一個是雅各布·伯恩斯坦,他是個記者,常常為《紐約時報》的風尚欄目撰稿,另一個是麥克斯·伯恩斯坦,他是 搖滾音樂人。還有三位妹妹,分別是迪莉婭·艾芙隆;艾米·艾芙隆(Amy Ephron),同樣是劇作家;以及做記者和小說家的哈莉·艾芙隆(Hallie Ephron)。
她的另一位朋友羅伯特·哥特列布(Robert Gottlieb),自從20世紀70年代起就開始編輯她的著作,他稱艾芙隆的死“對她的讀者、她的電影觀眾和她的同事,是件很可怕的事情”。他又補充 說,但“私下裡的諾拉甚至要更加了不起,永遠全心全意伴隨在你左右,同時又能為你注入一劑必要的現實的清醒劑”。
梅爾.斯特里普稱她為一個“彪悍的人”。
“她什麼都能幫上忙:醫生、餐館、食譜、演講,或者只是幾個小玩笑,我們時不時就會互相開幾句玩笑,”在電子郵件中斯特里普說:“在好好享受生活的方方面面上,她都是行家裡手。”
翻譯:詹涓
Nora Ephron, an essayist and humorist in the Dorothy Parker mold (only smarter and funnier, some said) who became one of her era’s most successful screenwriters and filmmakers, making romantic comedy hits like “Sleepless in Seattle” and “When Harry Met Sally,” died Tuesday night in Manhattan. She was 71.
Multimedia
Librado Romero/The New York Times
Nora Ephron in 1998 on home turf, the Upper West Side. More Photos »

Readers’ Comments

The cause was pneumonia brought on by acute myeloid leukemia, her son Jacob Bernstein said.
In a commencement address she delivered in 1996 at Wellesley College, her alma mater, Ms. Ephron recalled that women of her generation weren’t expected to do much of anything. But she wound up having several careers, all of them successfully and many of them simultaneously.
She was a journalist, a blogger, an essayist, a novelist, a playwright, an Oscar-nominated screenwriter and a movie director — a rarity in a film industry whose directorial ranks were and continue to be dominated by men. Her later box-office success included “You’ve Got Mail” and “Julie & Julia.” By the end of her life, though remaining remarkably youthful looking, she had even become something of a philosopher about age and its indignities. 

“Why do people write books that say it’s better to be older than to be younger?” she wrote in “I Feel Bad About My Neck,” her 2006 best-selling collection of essays. “It’s not better. Even if you have all your marbles, you’re constantly reaching for the name of the person you met the day before yesterday.” 

Nora Ephron was born on May 19, 1941, on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, the eldest of four sisters, all of whom became writers. That was no surprise; writing was the family business. Her father, Henry, and her mother, the former Phoebe Wolkind, were Hollywood screenwriters who wrote, among other films, “Carousel,” “There’s No Business Like Show Business” and “Captain Newman, M.D.”
 
“Everything is copy,” her mother once said, and she and her husband proved it by turning the college-age Nora into a character in a play, later a movie, “Take Her, She’s Mine.” The lesson was not lost on Ms. Ephron, who seldom wrote about her own children but could make sparkling copy out of almost anything else: the wrinkles on her neck, her apartment, cabbage strudel, Teflon pans and the tastelessness of egg-white omelets. 

She turned her painful breakup with her second husband, the Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein, into a best-selling novel, “Heartburn,” which she then recycled into a successful movie starring Jack Nicholson as a philandering husband and Meryl Streep as a quick-witted version of Ms. Ephron herself. 

When Ms. Ephron was 4, her parents moved from New York to Beverly Hills, where she grew up, graduating from Beverly Hills High School in 1958. At Wellesley, she began writing for the school newspaper, and in the summer of 1961 she was a summer intern in the Kennedy White House. She said later that perhaps her greatest accomplishment there was rescuing the speaker of the house, Sam Rayburn, from a men’s room in which he had inadvertently locked himself. In an essay for The New York Times in 2003, she said she was also probably the only intern that President John F. Kennedy had never hit on. 

After graduation from college in 1962, she moved to New York, a city she always adored, intent on becoming a journalist. Her first job was as a mail girl at Newsweek. (There were no mail boys, she later pointed out.) Soon she was contributing to a parody of The New York Post put out during the 1962 newspaper strike. Her piece of it earned her a tryout at The Post, where the publisher, Dorothy Schiff, remarked: “If they can parody The Post, they can write for it. Hire them.” 

Ms. Ephron stayed at The Post for five years, covering stories like the Beatles, the Star of India robbery at the American Museum of Natural History, and a pair of hooded seals at the Coney Island aquarium that refused to mate. 

“The Post was a terrible newspaper in the era I worked there,” she wrote, but added that the experience taught her to write short and to write around a subject, since the kinds of people she was assigned to cover were never going to give her much interview time. 

In the late 1960s Ms. Ephron turned to magazine journalism, at Esquire and New York mostly. She quickly made a name for herself by writing frank, funny personal essays — about the smallness of her breasts, for example — and tart, sharply observed profiles of people like Ayn Rand, Helen Gurley Brown and the composer and best-selling poet Rod McKuen. Some of these articles were controversial. In one, she criticized Betty Friedan for conducting a “thoroughly irrational” feud with Gloria Steinem; in another, she discharged a withering assessment of Women’s Wear Daily. 

But all her articles were characterized by humor and honesty, written in a clear, direct, understated style marked by an impeccable sense of when to deploy the punchline. (Many of her articles were assembled in the collections “Wallflower at the Orgy,” “Crazy Salad” and “Scribble Scribble.”) 

Ms. Ephron made as much fun of herself as of anyone else. She was labeled a practitioner of the New Journalism, with its embrace of novelistic devices in the name of reaching a deeper truth, but she always denied the connection. “I am not a new journalist, whatever that is,” she once wrote. “I just sit here at the typewriter and bang away at the old forms.” 

Ms. Ephron got into the movie business more or less by accident after her marriage to Mr. Bernstein in 1976. He and Bob Woodward, his partner in the Watergate investigation, were unhappy with William Goldman’s script for the movie version of their book “All the President’s Men,” so Mr. Bernstein and Ms. Ephron took a stab at rewriting it. Their version was ultimately not used, but it was a useful learning experience, she later said, and it brought her to the attention of people in Hollywood. 

Her first screenplay, written with her friend Alice Arlen, was for “Silkwood,” a 1983 film based on the life of Karen Silkwood, who died under suspicious circumstances while investigating abuses at a plutonium plant where she had worked. Ms. Arlen was in film school then, and Ms. Ephron had scant experience writing for anything other than the page. But Mike Nichols, who directed the movie (which starred Ms. Streep and Kurt Russell), said that the script made an immediate impression on him. He and Ms. Ephron had become friends when she visited him on the set of “Catch-22.”
 
“I think that was the beginning of her openly falling in love with the movies,” Mr. Nichols said in an interview, “and she and Alice came along with ‘Silkwood’ when I hadn’t made a movie in seven years. I couldn’t find anything that grabbed me.” He added: “Nora was so funny and so interesting that you didn’t notice that she was also necessary. I think a lot of her friends and readers will feel that.” 

Ms. Ephron followed “Silkwood” three years later with a screenplay adaptation of her own novel “Heartburn,” which was also directed by Mr. Nichols. But it was her script for “When Harry Met Sally,” which became a hit Rob Reiner movie in 1989 starring Billy Crystal and Meg Ryan, that established Ms. Ephron’s gift for romantic comedy and for delayed but happy endings that reconcile couples who are clearly meant for each other but don’t know it. 





 The scene wouldn’t have gotten past the Hollywood censors of the past, but in many other respects Ms. Ephron’s films are old-fashioned movies, only in a brand-new guise. Her 1998 hit, “You’ve Got Mail,” for example, which she both wrote (with her sister Delia) and directed, is partly a remake of the old Ernst Lubitsch film ‘The Shop Around the Corner.” 


Ms. Ephron began directing because she knew from her parents’ example how powerless screenwriters are (at the end of their careers both became alcoholics) and because, as she said in her Wellesley address, Hollywood had never been very interested in making movies by or about women. She once wrote, “One of the best things about directing movies, as opposed to merely writing them, is that there’s no confusion about who’s to blame: you are.”
Mr. Nichols said he had encouraged her to direct. “I knew she would be able to do it,” he recalled. “Not only did she have a complete comprehension of the process of making a movie — she simply soaked that up — but she had all the ancillary skills, the people skills, all the hundreds of things that are useful when you’re making a movie.” 

Her first effort at directing, “This Is My Life” (1992), with a screenplay by Ms. Ephron and her sister Delia, based on a novel by Meg Wolitzer about a single mother trying to become a standup comedian, was a dud. But Ms. Ephron redeemed herself in 1993 with “Sleepless in Seattle” (she shared the screenwriting credits), which brought Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan together so winningly that they were cast again in “You’ve Got Mail.” 

Among the other movies Ms. Ephron wrote and directed were “Lucky Numbers” (2000), “Bewitched” (2005) and, her last, “Julie & Julia” (2009), in which Ms. Streep played Julia Child.
She and Ms. Streep had been friends since they worked on “Silkwood” together. “Nora just looked at every situation and cocked her head and thought, ‘Hmmmm, how can I make this more fun?’ ” Ms. Streep wrote in an e-mail on Tuesday. 

Ms. Ephron earned three Oscar nominations for best screenplay, for “Silkwood,” “Sleepless in Seattle” and “When Harry Met Sally.” But in all her moviemaking years she never gave up writing in other forms. Two essay collections, “I Feel Bad About My Neck: And Other Reflections on Being a Woman” (2006) and “I Remember Nothing” (2010), were both best sellers. With her sister Delia she wrote a play, “Love, Loss, and What I Wore,” about women and their wardrobes (once calling it “ ‘The Vagina Monologues’ without the vaginas”) and by herself she wrote “Imaginary Friends,” a play, produced in 2002, about the literary and personal quarrel between Lillian Hellman and Mary McCarthy. 

She also became an enthusiastic blogger for The Huffington Post, writing on subjects like the Las Vegas mogul Steve Wynn’s accidentally putting a hole in a Picasso he owned and Ryan ONeal’s failing to recognize his own daughter and making a pass at her.
Several years ago, Ms. Ephron learned that she had myelodysplastic syndrome, a pre-leukemic condition, but she kept the illness a secret from all but a few intimates and continued to lead a busy, sociable life. 

“She had this thing about not wanting to whine,” the writer Sally Quinn said on Tuesday. “She didn’t like self-pity. It was always, you know, ‘Suck it up.’ ” 

Ms. Ephron’s first marriage, to the writer Dan Greenburg, ended in divorce, as did her marriage to Mr. Bernstein. In 1987 she married Nicholas Pileggi, the author of the books “Wiseguy” and “Casino.” (Her contribution to “Not Quite What I Was Planning: Six-Word Memoirs by Writers Famous and Obscure,” edited by Larry Smith, reads: “Secret to life, marry an Italian.”) 

In addition to her son Jacob Bernstein, a journalist who writes frequently for the Styles section of The Times, Ms. Ephron is survived by Mr. Pileggi; another son, Max Bernstein, a rock musician; and her sisters Delia Ephron; Amy Ephron, who is also a screenwriter; and Hallie Ephron, a journalist and novelist. 

In person Ms. Ephron — small and fine-boned with high cheeks and a toothy smile — had the same understated, though no less witty, style that she brought to the page.
“Sitting at a table with Nora was like being in a Nora Ephron movie,” Ms. Quinn said. “She was brilliant and funny.” 

She was also fussy about her hair and made a point of having it professionally blow-dried twice a week. “It’s cheaper by far than psychoanalysis and much more uplifting,” Ms. Ephron said.
Another friend, Robert Gottlieb, who had edited her books since the 1970s, said that her death would be “terrible for her readers and her movie audience and her colleagues.” But “the private Nora was even more remarkable,” he added, saying she was “always there for you with a full heart plus the crucial dose of the reality principle.” 

Ms. Streep called her a “stalwart.”
“You could call on her for anything: doctors, restaurants, recipes, speeches, or just a few jokes, and we all did it, constantly,” she wrote in her e-mail. “She was an expert in all the departments of living well.” 

The producer Scott Rudin recalled that less than two weeks before her death, he had a long phone session with her from the hospital while she was undergoing treatment, going over notes for a pilot she was writing for a TV series about a bank compliance officer. Afterward she told him, “If I could just get a hairdresser in here, we could have a meeting.” 

Ms. Ephron’s collection “I Remember Nothing” concludes with two lists, one of things she says she won’t miss and one of things she will. Among the “won’t miss” items are dry skin, Clarence Thomas, the sound of the vacuum cleaner, and panels on “Women in Film.” The other list, of the things she will miss, begins with “my kids” and “Nick” and ends this way: 

“Taking a bath
Coming over the bridge to Manhattan
Pie.” 


Paul Vitello contributed reporting.

美國名導艾芙朗逝世 享壽71歲 【10:25】


美國知名導演及編劇艾芙朗,因白血病所引發的肺炎去世,享壽71歲。(路透社)
〔本報訊〕美國知名導演及編劇艾芙朗(Nora Ephron),驚傳因急性骨髓性白血病所引發的肺炎去世,享壽71歲。

執導家喻戶曉電影《電子情書》(You've Got Mail)和《神仙家庭》(Bewitched)的導演艾芙朗,原本是紐約時報的記者,後來她改當編劇,浪漫喜劇作品如《當哈利碰上莎莉》(When Harry Met Sally)和《西雅圖夜未眠》(Sleepless in Seattle),都曾入圍奧斯卡金像獎最佳原創劇本獎,而她在《美味關係》(Julie & Julia)中身兼編劇和導演,該片也讓美國巨星梅莉史翠普(Meryl Streep)奪下2010奧斯卡最佳女主角。

艾芙朗的父母也都是編劇,艾芙朗曾在2009CNN訪談中說:「我的父母很風趣,且他們相信,任何在生命中發生的事都可以變成一個好故事,而這就是幽默守則的第一條。」她也表示:「我不認為你可以完全無幽默感來度過任何事情。」

艾芙朗於1987年,剛好也是她跟前夫卡爾·伯恩斯坦(Carl Bernstein)離婚八年的時候,嫁給美國作家尼可拉斯皮利奇(Nicholas Pileggi),他是知名《賭城風雲》(Casino)、《四海好傢伙》(Wiseguy)的作者,兩部作品也皆被改拍成電影。

對於艾芙朗的死訊,出版社亞飛諾普(Alfred A. Knopf)至上敬意:「她帶給許多生活不如意的人數不清的歡樂,她將會被永遠記得。」美國紐約市長彭博Bloomberg說:「從艾芙朗早期在紐約時報 到他後來在好萊塢的成就,她熱愛任何一個紐約的故事,而她也可以將他們轉述成像她自己的故事一樣精彩。」 

2012年6月21日 星期四

Julian Sorell Huxley, Andrew Fielding Huxley,



Huxley brothers - 1947年3月24日 - Google 圖書結果

LIFE - 156 頁 - 雜誌
Today Julian and Aldous Huxley represent two extremes of belief which modern intellectuals can reach. At one philosophic pole stands Julian the materialist, ...




Sir Julian Sorell Huxley FRS[1] (22 June 1887 – 14 February 1975) was an English evolutionary biologist, humanist and internationalist. He was a proponent of natural selection, and a leading figure in the mid-twentieth century evolutionary synthesis. He was Secretary of the Zoological Society of London (1935–1942), the first Director of UNESCO, and a founding member of the World Wildlife Fund.
Huxley was well known for his presentation of science in books and articles, and on radio and television. He directed an Oscar-winning wildlife film. He was awarded UNESCO's Kalinga Prize for the popularisation of science in 1953, the Darwin Medal of the Royal Society in 1956,[1] and the Darwin–Wallace Medal of the Linnaean Society in 1958. He was also knighted in that same year, 1958, a hundred years after Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace announced the theory of evolution by natural selection. In 1959 he received a Special Award of the Lasker Foundation in the category Planned ParenthoodWorld Population. Huxley was a prominent member of the British Eugenics Society and its president from 1959–1962.

Contents

Life

Huxley came from the distinguished Huxley family. His brother was the writer Aldous Huxley, and his half-brother a fellow biologist and Nobel laureate, Andrew Huxley; his father was writer and editor Leonard Huxley; and his paternal grandfather was Thomas Henry Huxley, a friend and supporter of Charles Darwin and proponent of evolution. His maternal grandfather was the academic Tom Arnold, great-uncle poet Matthew Arnold and great-grandfather Thomas Arnold of Rugby School.

Early life


Family tree
Huxley was born on 22 June 1887, at the London house of his aunt, the novelist Mary Augusta Ward, while his father was attending the jubilee celebrations of Queen Victoria. Huxley grew up at the family home in Surrey, England where he showed an early interest in nature, as he was given lessons by his grandfather, Thomas Henry Huxley. When he heard his grandfather talking at dinner about the lack of parental care in fish, Julian piped up with "What about the stickleback, Gran'pater?" Also, according to Julian himself, his grandfather took him to visit J. D. Hooker at Kew.[2]

T.H. Huxley with Julian in 1893
At the age of thirteen Huxley attended Eton College as a King's Scholar, and continued to develop scientific interests; his grandfather had influenced the school to build science laboratories much earlier. At Eton he developed an interest in ornithology, guided by science master W. D. 'Piggy' Hill. "Piggy was a genius as a teacher... I have always been grateful to him."[3] In 1905 Huxley won a scholarship in Zoology to Balliol College, Oxford.

Student life

In 1906, after a summer in Germany, Huxley took his place in Oxford, where he developed a particular interest in embryology and protozoa. In the autumn term of his final year, 1908, his mother died from cancer at only 46: a terrible blow for her husband, three sons and young eight-year old daughter Margaret. In 1909 he graduated with first class honours, and spent that July at the international gathering for the centenary of Darwin's birth, held at the University of Cambridge. Also, it was the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of the Origin of species.

Career

Early career

Huxley got a scholarship to spend a year at the Naples Marine Biological Station where he developed his interest in developmental biology by investigating sea squirts and sea urchins. In 1910 he was appointed as Demonstrator in the Department of Zoology and Comparative Anatomy at Oxford University, and started on the systematic observation of the courtship habits of water birds such as the Common Redshank (a wader) and grebes (which are divers). Bird watching in childhood had given Huxley his interest in ornithology, and he helped devise systems for the surveying and conservation of birds. His particular interest was bird behaviour, especially the courtship of water birds. His 1914 paper on the Great Crested Grebe, later published as a book, was a landmark in avian ethology; his invention of vivid labels for the rituals (such as 'penguin dance', 'plesiosaurus race' etc.) made the ideas memorable and interesting to the general reader.[4]

Great Crested Grebes
In 1912 his life took a new turn. He was asked by Edgar Odell Lovett to take the lead in setting up the new Department of Biology at the newly created Rice Institute (now Rice University) in Houston, Texas, which he accepted, planning to start the following year. Huxley made an exploratory trip to the USA in September 1912, visiting a number of leading universities as well as the Rice Institute. At T.H. Morgan's fly lab (Columbia University) he invited H.J. Muller to join him at Rice. Muller agreed to be his deputy, hurried to complete his PhD and moved to Houston for the beginning of the 1915–1916 academic year. At Rice, Muller taught biology and continued Drosophila lab work.


Julian Huxley
British Army Intelligence Corps 1918
Before taking up the post of Assistant Professor at the Rice Institute, Huxley spent a year in Germany preparing for his demanding new job. Working in a laboratory just months before the outbreak of World War I, Huxley overheard fellow academics comment on a passing aircraft "it will not be long before those planes are flying over England". In 1913 Huxley had a nervous breakdown after the break-up of his relationship with 'K',[5] and rested in a nursing home. His depression returned the next year, and he and his brother Trevenen (two years his junior) ended up in the same nursing home. Sadly, Trevenen hanged himself. Depressive illness had afflicted others in the Huxley family.
One pleasure of Huxley's life in Texas was the sight of his first hummingbird, though his visit to Edward Avery McIlhenny's estate on Avery Island in Louisiana was more significant. The McIlhennys and their Avery cousins owned the entire island, and the McIlhenny branch used it to produce their famous Tabasco sauce. Birds were one of McIlhenny's passions, however, and around 1895 he had set up a private sanctuary on the Island, called Bird City. There Huxley found egrets, herons and bitterns. These water birds, like the grebes, exhibit mutual courtship, with the pairs displaying to each other, and with the secondary sexual characters equally developed in both sexes.[6]
In September 1916 Huxley returned to England from Texas to assist in the war effort, working in the British Army Intelligence Corps, first in Sussex, and then in northern Italy. After the war he became a Fellow at New College, Oxford and was made Senior Demonstrator in the University Department of Zoology. In fact, Huxley took the place of his old tutor Geoffrey Smith, who had been killed in the battle of the Somme on the Western Front.
In 1919 Huxley married Juliette Baillot (1896–1994). She was a French Swiss girl whom he had met at Garsington Manor, the country house of Lady Ottoline Morrell, a Bloomsbury Group socialite with a penchant for artists and intellectuals. The newly-weds' life together included students, faculty wives, grebes and, unfortunately, another depressive breakdown, this time rather serious. From his wife's autobiography it seems his mental illness took the form of a bipolar disorder, with the depressive phases being of moderate to severe intensity. It took a long time for him to recover on this occasion, but despite this he left a legacy of students who admired him, and who became leaders in zoology for the next thirty or forty years. E.B. Ford always remembered his openness and encouragement at the start of his career.[7][8]

Huxley with his two sons, Anthony and Francis.
In 1925 Huxley moved to King's College London as Professor of Zoology, but in 1927, to the amazement of his colleagues, he resigned his chair to work full time with H.G. Wells and his son G.P. Wells on The Science of Life (see below). For some time Huxley retained his room at King's College, and continued as Honorary Lecturer in the Zoology Department. From 1927–31 he was also Fullerian Professor of Physiology at the Royal Institution, where he gave an annual lectures series. No-one realised it at the time, but he had come to the end of his life as a university academic.

Juliette Huxley, c.1929.
In 1929, after finishing work on The Science of Life, Huxley visited East Africa to advise the Colonial Office on education in British East Africa (for the most part Kenya, Uganda and Tanganyika). He discovered that the wildlife on the Serengeti plain was almost undisturbed because the tsetse fly (the vector for the trypanosome parasite which causes sleeping sickness in humans) prevented human settlement there. He tells about these experiences in Africa view (1931), and so does his wife.[9] She reveals that he fell in love with an 18-year old American girl on board ship (when Juliette was not present), and then presented Juliette with his ideas for an open marriage: "What Julian really wanted was... a definite freedom from the conventional bonds of marriage." The couple separated for a while; Julian traveled to the USA, hoping to land a suitable appointment and, in due course, to marry Miss Weldmeier. He left no account of what transpired, but he was evidently not successful, and returned to England to resume his marriage in 1931. For the next couple of years Huxley still angled for an appointment in the USA, without success.[10]

Mid career

As the 1930s started, Huxley travelled widely and took part in a variety of activities which were partly scientific and partly political. In 1931 Huxley visited the USSR at the invitation of Intourist, where initially he admired the results of social and economic planning on a large scale. Later, back in the United Kingdom, he became a founding member of the think tank Political and Economic Planning.
In the 1930s Huxley visited Kenya and other East African countries to see the conservation work, including the creation of national parks, which was happening in the few areas that remained uninhabited due to malaria. From 1933–38 he was a member of the committee for Lord Hailey's Africa Survey.

Huxley lights a cigarette under his grandfather's portrait, c.1935.
In 1935 Huxley was appointed Secretary to the Zoological Society of London, and spent much of the next seven years running the society and its zoological gardens, the London Zoo and Whipsnade Park, alongside his writing and research. The previous Director, Peter Chalmers Mitchell, had been in post for many years, and had skillfully avoided conflict with the Fellows and Council. Things were rather different when Huxley arrived. Huxley was not a skilled administrator; his wife said "He was impatient... and lacked tact".[11] He instituted a number of changes and innovations, more than some approved of. For example, Huxley introduced a whole range of ideas designed to make the Zoo child-friendly. Today, this would pass without comment; but then it was more controversial. He fenced off the Fellows' Lawn to establish Pets Corner; he appointed new assistant curators, encouraging them to talk to children; he initiated the Zoo Magazine.[12] Fellows and their guests had the privilege of free entry on Sundays, a closed day to the general public. Today, that would be unthinkable, and Sundays are now open to the public. Huxley's mild suggestion (that the guests should pay) encroached on territory the Fellows thought was theirs by right.
In 1941 Huxley was invited to the United States on a lecturing tour, and generated some controversy by saying that he thought the United States should join World War II: a few weeks later came the attack on Pearl Harbor. When the USA joined the war, he found it difficult to get a passage back to the UK, and his lecture tour was extended. The Council of the Zoological Society — "a curious assemblage... of wealthy amateurs, self-perpetuating and autocratic"[13] — uneasy with their Secretary, used this as an opportunity to remove him. This they did by the rather unpleasant tactic of abolishing his post "to save expenses". Since Huxley had taken a half-salary cut at the start of the war, and no salary at all whilst he was in America, the Council's action was widely read as a personal attack on Huxley. A public controversy ensued, but eventually the Council got its way.
In 1943 he was asked by the British government to join the Colonial Commission on Higher Education. The Commission's remit was to survey the West African Commonwealth countries for suitable locations for the creation of universities. There he acquired a disease, went down with hepatitis, and had a serious mental breakdown. He was completely disabled, treated with ECT, and took a full year to recover. He was 55.

Later career

Huxley, a lifelong internationalist with a concern for education, got involved in the creation of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and became the organization's first Director-General in 1946. His term of office, six years in the Charter, was cut down to two years at the behest of the USA delegation.[14] The reasons are not known for sure, but his left-wing tendencies and humanism were likely factors. In a fortnight he dashed off a 60-page booklet on the purpose and philosophy of UNESCO, eventually printed and issued as an official document. There were, however, many conservative opponents of his scientific humanism. His idea of restraining population growth with birth control was anathema to both the Catholic Church and the Comintern/Cominform. In its first few years UNESCO was dynamic and broke new ground; since Huxley it has become larger, more bureaucratic and stable.[15][16] The personal and social side of the years in Paris are well described by his wife.[17]
Huxley's internationalist and conservation interests also led him, with Victor Stolan, Sir Peter Scott, Max Nicholson and Guy Mountfort, to set up the WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature under its former name of the World Wildlife Fund).
Another post-war activity was Huxley's attack on the Soviet politico-scientist Trofim Lysenko, who had espoused a Lamarckian heredity, made unscientific pronouncements on agriculture, used his influence to destroy classical genetics in Russia and to move genuine scientists from their posts. In 1940, the leading botanical geneticist Nikolai Vavilov was arrested, and Lysenko replaced him as director of the Institute of Genetics. In 1941, Vavilov was tried, found guilty of 'sabotage' and sentenced to death. Reprieved, he died in jail of malnutrition in 1943. Lysenko's machinations were the cause of his arrest. Worse still, Lysenkoism not only denied proven genetic facts, it stopped the artificial selection of crops on Darwinian principles. This may have contributed to the regular shortage of food from the Soviet agricultural system (Soviet famines). Huxley, who had twice visited the Soviet Union, was originally not anti-communist, but the ruthless adoption of Lysenkoism by Joseph Stalin ended his tolerant attitude.[18] Lysenko ended his days in a Soviet mental hospital, and Vavilov's reputation was posthumously restored in 1955.
In the 1950s Huxley played a role in bringing to the English-speaking public the work of the French Jesuit-palaeontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, who he believed had been unfairly treated by the Catholic and Jesuit hierarchy. Both men believed in evolution, but differed in its interpretation as de Chardin was a Christian, whilst Huxley was an unbeliever. Huxley wrote the forward to The Phenomenon of Man (1959) and was bitterly attacked by his rationalist friends for doing so.[19]
On Huxley's death at 87 in 1975, John Owen (Director of National Parks for Tanganyika) wrote "Julian Huxley was one of the world's great men... he played a seminal role in wild life conservation in [East] Africa in the early days... [and in] the far-reaching influence he exerted [on] the international community".[20]
In addition to his international and humanist concerns, his research interests covered evolution in all its aspects, ethology, embryology, genetics, anthropology and to some extent the infant field of cell biology. Julian's eminence as an advocate for evolution, and especially his contribution to the new evolutionary synthesis, led to his awards of the Darwin Medal of the Royal Society in 1956,[1] and the Darwin–Wallace Medal of the Linnaean Society in 1958. 1958 was the centenary anniversary of the joint presentation On the tendency of species to form varieties; and the perpetuation of varieties and species by natural means of selection by Darwin and Wallace.[21]
Huxley was a friend and mentor of the biologists and Nobel laureates Konrad Lorenz and Niko Tinbergen,[22] and taught and encouraged many others. In general, he was more of an all-round naturalist than his famous grandfather,[23] and contributed much to the acceptance of natural selection. His outlook was international, and somewhat idealistic: his interest in progress and evolutionary humanism runs through much of his published work.[24]

Special themes

Evolution

Huxley was the most important biologist after August Weismann to insist on natural selection as the primary agent in evolution. He was a major player in the mid-twentieth century evolutionary synthesis. A fine communicator, he was a prominent populariser of biological science to the public. Three aspects deserve special mention:

Personal influence

  • In the early 20th century he was one of the minority of biologists[25] who believed that natural selection was the main driving force of evolution, and that evolution occurred by small steps and not by saltation (jumps). These opinions are now standard.[26]
    Though his time as an academic was quite brief, he taught and encouraged a number of evolutionary biologists at the University of Oxford in the 1920s. Charles Elton (ecology), Alister Hardy (marine biology) and John Baker (cytology) all became highly successful, and Baker eventually wrote Huxley's Royal Society obituary memoir.[1][27]
    Perhaps the most significant was Edmund Brisco Ford, who founded a field of research called ecological genetics, which played a role in the evolutionary synthesis. Another important disciple was Gavin de Beer, who wrote on evolution and development, and became Director of the Natural History Museum. Both these fine scholars had attended Huxley's lectures on genetics, experimental zoology (including embryology) and ethology. Later, they became his collaborators, and then leaders in their own right.
  • In an era when scientists did not travel so frequently as today, Huxley was an exception, for he travelled widely in Europe, Africa and the USA. He was therefore able to learn from and influence other scientists, naturalists and administrators. In the USA he was able to meet other evolutionists at a critical time in the reassessment of natural selection. In Africa he was able to influence colonial administrators about education and wild-life conservation. In Europe, through UNESCO, he was at the centre of the post-World War II revival of education. In Russia, however, his experiences were mixed. His initially favourable view was changed by his growing awareness of Stalin's murderous repression, and the Lysenko affair.[28] There seems little evidence that he had any effect on the Soviet Union, and the same could be said for some other Western scientists.
    "Marxist-Leninism had become a dogmatic religion... and like all dogmatic religions, it had turned from reform to persecution."[29]

Evolutionary synthesis

  • Huxley was one of the main architects of the new evolutionary synthesis which took place around the time of World War II. The synthesis of genetic and population ideas produced a consensus which reigned in biology from about 1940, and which is still broadly tenable.
"The most informative episode in the history of evolutionary biology was the establishment of the 'neo-Darwinian synthesis'." Berry and Bradshaw, 1992.[30] The synthesis was brought about "not by one side being proved right and the others wrong, but by the exchange of the most viable components of the previously competing research strategies". Ernst Mayr, 1980.[31]
  • Huxley's first 'trial run' was the treatment of evolution in the Science of Life (1929–30), and in 1936 he published a long and significant paper for the British Association.[32] In 1938 came three lengthy reviews on major evolutionary topics.[33][34][35] Two of these papers were on the subject of sexual selection, an idea of Darwin's whose standing has been revived in recent times.[36][37] Huxley thought that sexual selection was "...merely an aspect of natural selection which... is concerned with characters which subserve mating, and are usually sex-limited". This rather grudging acceptance of sexual selection was influenced by his studies on the courtship of the Great Crested Grebe (and other birds that pair for life): the courtship takes place mostly after mate selection, not before.
  • Now it was time for Huxley to tackle the subject of evolution at full length, in what became the defining work of his life. His role was that of a synthesiser, and it helped that he had met many of the other participants. His book Evolution: the modern synthesis was written whilst he was Secretary to the Zoological Society, and made use of his remarkable collection of reprints covering the first part of the century. It was published in 1942. Reviews of the book in learned journals were little short of ecstatic; the American Naturalist called it "The outstanding evolutionary treatise of the decade, perhaps of the century. The approach is thoroughly scientific; the command of basic information amazing".[38][39]
  • Huxley's main co-respondents in the modern evolutionary synthesis are usually listed as Ernst Mayr, Theodosius Dobzhansky, George Gaylord Simpson, Bernhard Rensch, Ledyard Stebbins and the population geneticists J.B.S. Haldane, Ronald Fisher and Sewall Wright.
    However, at the time of Huxley's book several of these had yet to make their distinctive contribution. Certainly, for Huxley, E.B. Ford and his co-workers in ecological genetics were at least as important; and Cyril Darlington, the chromosome expert, was a notable source of facts and ideas.
    An analysis of the 'authorities cited' index of Evolution the modern synthesis shows indirectly those whom Huxley regarded as the most important contributors to the synthesis up to 1941 (the book was published in 1942, and references go up to 1941). The authorities cited 20 or more times are:
    Darlington, Darwin, Dobzhansky, Fisher, Ford, Goldschmidt, Haldane, J.S. Huxley, Muller, Rensch, Turrill, Wright.
    This list contains a few surprises. Goldschmidt was an influential geneticist who advocated evolution by saltation, and was sometimes mentioned in disagreement. Turrill provided Huxley with botanical information. The list omits three key members of the synthesis who are listed above: Mayr, Stebbins the botanist and Simpson the palaeontologist. Mayr gets 16 citations and more in the two later editions; all three published outstanding and relevant books some years later, and their contribution to the synthesis is unquestionable. Their lesser weight in Huxley's citations was caused by the early publication date of his book. Huxley's book is not strong in palaeontology, which illustrates perfectly why Simpson's later works were such an important contribution.
  • It was Huxley who coined the terms the new synthesis and evolutionary synthesis;[40] he also invented the term cline in 1938 to describe species whose members fall into a series of sub-species with continuous change in characters over a geographical area.[41][42] The classic example of a cline is the circle of subspecies of the gull Larus round the Arctic zone. This cline is an example of a ring species.
    Some of Huxley's last contributions to the evolutionary synthesis were on the subject of ecological genetics. He noted how surprisingly widespread polymorphism is in nature, with visible morphism much more prevalent in some groups than others. The immense diversity of colour and pattern in small bivalve molluscs, brittlestars, sea-anemones, tubicular polychaetes and various grasshoppers is perhaps maintained by making recognition by predators more difficult.[43][44][45]

Evolutionary progress

  • He always believed that on a broad view evolution led to advances in organisation. Progress without a goal was one of his phrases, to distinguish his point of view from classical Aristotelian teleology. "The ordinary man, or at least the ordinary poet, philosopher and theologian, always was anxious to find purpose in the evolutionary process. I believe this reasoning to be totally false."[46]
    The idea of evolutionary progress was subjected to some fierce criticism in the latter part of the twentieth century. Cladists, for example, were (and are) strongly against any suggestion that a group could be scientifically described as 'advanced' and others as 'primitive'. For them, and especially for the radical group of transformed cladists, there is no such thing as an advanced group, they are derived or apomorphic. Primitive groups are plesiomorphic. Ironically, it was Huxley who invented the terms clade and grades.[47][48][49]
    However, to take a rather extreme case, it would seem strange to say that when man is compared to bacteria, that mankind is not a vastly more complex and advanced form of life; or that the invasion of the land by plants and animals was not a great advance in the history of life on this planet. On this issue Julian was at the opposite end of the spectrum from his grandfather, who was, at least for the first half of his career, a propagandist for 'persistent types', getting close to denying any advances at all.[50][51]
  • Huxley argued his case many times, even in his most important works. In the final chapter of his Evolution the modern synthesis he defines evolutionary progress as "a raising of the upper level of biological efficiency, this being defined as increased control over and independence of the environment,"[52]
    Evolution in action discusses evolutionary progress at length: "Natural selection plus time produces biological improvement... 'Improvement' is not yet a recognised technical term in biology... however, living things are improved during evolution... Darwin was not afraid to use the word for the results of natural selection in general... I believe that improvement can become one of the key concepts in evolutionary biology."
    "Can it be scientifically defined? Improvements in biological machinery... the limbs and teeth of grazing horses... the increase in brain-power... The eyes of a dragon-fly, which can see all round [it] in every direction, are an improvement over the mere microscopic eye-spots of early forms of life."[53]
    "[Over] the whole range of evolutionary time we see general advance — improvement in all the main properties of life, including its general organization. 'Advance' is thus a useful term for long-term improvement in some general property of life. [But] improvement is not universal. Lower forms manage to survive alongside higher".[54]
    These excerpts are much abbreviated, but give some idea of his way of thinking. He addresses the topic of 'persistent types' (living fossils) later in the same book (pp 126–8).
  • The question of evolutionary advancement has quite a history. Of course, pre-Darwin, it was believed without question that Man stood at the head of a pyramid (scala naturae). The matter is not so simple with evolution by natural selection; Darwin's own opinion varied from time to time. In the Origin he wrote "And as natural selection works by and for the good of each being, all corporeal and mental endowments will tend to progress towards perfection".[55] This was much too strong; as Sober remarks, there is nothing in the theory of natural selection which demands that selection must produce an increase in complexity or any other measure of advancement. It is merely compatible with the theory that this might happen.[56] Elsewhere Darwin admits that "naturalists have not yet defined to each other's satisfaction what is meant by high and low forms" (p336); nor have they now – this is one of the problems. Other evolutionary biologists have had similar thoughts to Huxley: G. Ledyard Stebbins[57] and Bernhard Rensch,[58] for example. The term used to describe progressive evolution is anagenesis, though this term does not necessarily include the idea of improvement.
    The objective description of complexity was one of the issues addressed by cybernetics in the 1950s. The idea that advanced machines (including living beings) could exert more control over their environments and operate in a wider range of situations perhaps serves as a basis for making the terms such as 'advanced' amenable to more exact definition.[59][60] This is a debate that continues today.
For a modern survey of the idea of progress in evolution see Nitecki[61] and Dawkins.[62]

Secular humanism

Huxley's humanism[63] came from his appreciation that mankind was in charge of its own destiny (at least in principle), and this raised the need for a sense of direction and a system of ethics. His grandfather T.H. Huxley, when faced with similar problems, had promoted agnosticism, but Julian chose humanism as being more directed to supplying a basis for ethics. Julian's thinking went along these lines: "The critical point in the evolution of man... was when he acquired the use of [language]... Man's development is potentially open... He has developed a new method of evolution: the transmission of organized experience by way of tradition, which... largely overrides the automatic process of natural selection as the agent of change".[64] Both Huxley and his grandfather gave Romanes Lectures on the possible connection between evolution and ethics.[65] (see evolutionary ethics)
Huxley had a close association with the British rationalist and secular humanist movements. He was an Honorary Associate of the Rationalist Press Association from 1927 until his death, and on the formation of the British Humanist Association in 1963 became its first President, to be succeeded by AJ Ayer in 1965. He was also closely involved with the International Humanist and Ethical Union. Many of Huxley's books address humanist themes. In 1962 Huxley accepted the American Humanist Association's annual "Humanist of the Year" award.
Huxley also presided over the founding Congress of the International Humanist and Ethical Union and served with John Dewey, Albert Einstein and Thomas Mann on the founding advisory board of the First Humanist Society of New York.

Religious naturalism

Huxley wrote that "There is no separate supernatural realm: all phenomena are part of one natural process of evolution. There is no basic cleavage between science and religion;... I believe that [a] drastic reorganization of our pattern of religious thought is now becoming necessary, from a god-centered to an evolutionary-centered pattern".[66] Some believe the appropriate label for these views is religious naturalism.[67]
"Many people assert that this abandonment of the god hypothesis means the abandonment of all religion and all moral sanctions. This is simply not true. But it does mean, once our relief at jettisoning an outdated piece of ideological furniture is over, that we must construct something to take its place."[66]

Eugenics and race

Huxley was a prominent member of the British Eugenics Society,[68] and was Vice-President (1937–1944) and President (1959–1962). He thought eugenics was important for removing undesirable variants from the human gene pool; but at least after World War II he believed race was a meaningless concept in biology, and its application to humans was highly inconsistent.[69]
Huxley was an outspoken critic of the most extreme eugenicism in the 1920s and 1930s (the stimulus for which was the greater fertility of the 'feckless' poor compared to the 'responsible' prosperous classes). He was, nevertheless, a leading figure in the eugenics movement (see, for example, Eugenics manifesto). He gave the Galton memorial lecture twice, in 1936 and 1962. In his writing he used this argument several times: no-one doubts the wisdom of managing the germ-plasm of agricultural stocks, so why not apply the same concept to human stocks? "The agricultural analogy appears over and over again as it did in the writings of many American eugenicists."[70]
Huxley was one of many intellectuals at the time who believed that the lowest class in society was genetically inferior. This passage, from 1941, puts the view forcefully:
"The lowest strata are reproducing too fast. Therefore... they must not have too easy access to relief or hospital treatment lest the removal of the last check on natural selection should make it too easy for children to be produced or to survive; long unemployment should be a ground for sterilisation."[71]
Here, he does not demean the working class in general, but aims for "the virtual elimination of the few lowest and most degenerate types".[72] The sentiment is not at all atypical of the time, and similar views were held by many geneticists (William E. Castle, C.B. Davenport, H.J. Muller are examples), and by other prominent intellectuals.
Concerning a public health and racial policy in general, Huxley wrote that "...unless [civilised societies] invent and enforce adequate measures for regulating human reproduction, for controlling the quantity of population, and at least preventing the deterioration of quality of racial stock, they are doomed to decay..."[73] and remarked how biology should be the chief tool for rendering social politics scientific.
In the opinion of Duvall, "His views fell well within the spectrum of opinion acceptable to the English liberal intellectual elite. He shared Nature's enthusiasm for birth control, and 'voluntary' sterilization."[74] However, the word 'English' in this passage is unnecessary: such views were widespread.[75] Duvall comments that Huxley's enthusiasm for centralised social and economic planning and anti-industrial values was common to leftist ideologists during the inter-war years. Towards the end of his life Huxley himself must have recognised how unpopular these views became after the end of World War II. In the two volumes of his autobiography there is no mention of eugenics in the index, nor is Galton mentioned; and the subject has also been omitted from many of the obituaries and biographies. An exception is the proceedings of a conference organised by the British Eugenics Society.[76]
In response to the rise of European fascism in the 1930s he was asked to write We Europeans with the ethnologist A.C. Haddon, zoologist Alexander Carr-Saunders and historian of science Charles Singer. Huxley suggested the word 'race' be replaced with ethnic group. After the Second World War he was instrumental in producing the UNESCO statement The Race Question,[77] which asserted that:
"A race, from the biological standpoint, may therefore be defined as one of the group of populations constituting the species Homo sapiens"... "National, religious, geographic, linguistic and cult groups do not necessary coincide with racial groups: the cultural traits of such groups have no demonstrated genetic connexion (sic) with racial traits. Because serious errors of this kind are habitually committed when the term ‘race’ is used in popular parlance, it would be better when speaking of human races to drop the term ‘race’ altogether and speak of ethnic groups"... "Now what has the scientist to say about the groups of mankind which may be recognized at the present time? Human races can be and have been differently classified by different anthropologists, but at the present time most anthropologists agree on classifying the greater part of present-day mankind into three major divisions, as follows: The Mongoloid Division; The Negroid Division; The Caucasoid Division."... "Catholics, Protestants, Moslems and Jews are not races...""The biological fact of race and the myth of “race” should be distinguished. For all practical social purposes ‘race’ is not so much a biological phenomenon as a social myth. The myth ‘race’ has created an enormous amount of human and social damage. In recent years it has taken a heavy toll in human lives and caused untold suffering. It still prevents the normal development of millions of human beings and deprives civilization of the effective co-operation of productive minds. The biological differences between ethnic groups should be disregarded from the standpoint of social acceptance and social action. The unity of mankind from both the biological and social viewpoint is the main thing. To recognize this and to act accordingly is the first requirement of modern man..."
Huxley won the second Anisfield-Wolf Book Award for We Europeans in 1937.
In 1957 Huxley coined the term "transhumanism" to describe the view that man should better himself through science and technology, possibly including eugenics, but also, importantly, the improvement of the social environment.

Public life and popularisation

Huxley was always able to write well, and was ever willing to address the public on scientific topics. Well over half his books are addressed to an educated general audience, and he wrote often in periodicals and newspapers. The most extensive bibliography of Huxley lists some of these ephemeral articles, though there are others unrecorded.[78]
These articles, some reissued as Essays of a biologist (1923), probably led to the invitation from H.G. Wells to help write a comprehensive work on biology for a general readership, The Science of Life.[17] This work was published in stages in 1929–30,[79] and in one volume in 1931. Of this Robert Olby said "Book IV The essence of the controversies about evolution offers perhaps the clearest, most readable, succinct and informative popular account of the subject ever penned. It was here that he first expounded his own version of what later developed into the evolutionary synthesis".[80][81] In his memoirs, Huxley says that, all told, he made close to £10,000 out of the book.[82]
In 1934 Huxley collaborated with the naturalist Ronald Lockley to create for Alexander Korda the world's first natural history documentary The Private Life of the Gannets. For the film, shot with the support of the Royal Navy around Grassholm off the Pembrokeshire coast, they won an Oscar for best documentary.[83]
Huxley had given talks on the radio since the 1920s, followed by written versions in The Listener. In later life, he became known to an even wider audience through television. In 1939 the BBC asked him to be a regular panelist on a Home Service general knowledge show, The Brains Trust, in which he and other panelists were asked to discuss questions submitted by listeners. The show was commissioned to keep up war time morale, by preventing the war from "disrupting the normal discussion of interesting ideas". The audience was not large for this somewhat elite program; however, listener research ranked Huxley the most popular member of the Brains Trust from 1941 to 1944.[84][85]
Later, he was a regular panelist on one of the BBC's first quiz shows (1955) Animal, Vegetable, Mineral? in which participants were asked to talk about objects chosen from museum and university collections.
In his essay The Crowded World Huxley was openly critical of Communist and Catholic attitudes to birth control, population control and overpopulation. Based on variable rates of compound interest, Huxley predicted a probable world population of 6 billion by 2000. The United Nations Population Fund marked 12 October 1999 as The Day of Six Billion.[86][87]

Terms coined

Huxley's use of language was highly skilled, and when no word seemed to suit he invented one. These are the most significant:

Titles and phrases

Huxley always chose his titles carefully. He wrote about fifty books (depending on how you count them), and these themes are characteristic:
------

Sir Andrew Fielding Huxley, OM, FRS (22 November 1917 – 30 May 2012)[1] was an English physiologist and biophysicist.

Contents

Early years

Huxley was the youngest son of the writer and editor Leonard Huxley by his second wife Rosalind Bruce, and hence half-brother of the writer Aldous Huxley and fellow biologist Julian Huxley, and grandson of the biologist T. H. Huxley. He studied Natural Sciences at Trinity College, Cambridge. In 1947 he married Jocelyn Richenda Gammell Pease (1925–2003), the daughter of the geneticist Michael Pease and his wife Helen Bowen Wedgwood, a daughter of the first Lord Wedgwood, and is thus affiliated with the Darwin–Wedgwood family. They have one son and five daughters:
  • Janet Rachel Huxley (born 20 April 1948)
  • Stewart Leonard Huxley (born 19 December 1949)
  • Camilla Rosalind Huxley (born 12 March 1952)
  • Eleanor Bruce Huxley (born 21 February 1959)
  • Henrietta Catherine Huxley (born 25 December 1960)
  • Clare Marjory Pease Huxley (born 4 November 1962)

Career

He won the 1963 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his experimental and mathematical work with Alan Hodgkin on the basis of nerve action potentials, the electrical impulses that enable the activity of an organism to be coordinated by a central nervous system.[2] Hodgkin and Huxley shared the prize that year with John Eccles, who was cited for research on synapses. Hodgkin and Huxley's findings led the pair to hypothesize the existence of ion channels, which were isolated only decades later. Together with the Swiss physiologist Robert Stämpfli he evidenced the existence of saltatory conduction in myelinated nerve fibres.
Huxley was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society on 17 March 1955. He was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II on 12 November 1974. Sir Andrew was then appointed to the Order of Merit on 11 November 1983.
Huxley passed away on 30 May 2012 in his home in Grantchester, England.

Nobel Prize

The experimental measurements on which the pair based their action potential theory represent one of the earliest applications of a technique of electrophysiology known as the voltage clamp. The second critical element of their research used the giant axon of the Atlantic squid (Loligo pealei), which enabled them to record ionic currents as they would not have been able to do in almost any other neuron, such cells being too small to study by the techniques of the time. The experiments started at the University of Cambridge, beginning in 1935 with frog sciatic nerve, and soon after they continued their work using squid giant axons at the Marine Biological Association Laboratory in Plymouth. In 1939, reporting work done in Plymouth, Alan Hodgkin and Andrew Huxley published a short paper in the journal Nature announcing their achievement of recording action potentials from inside a nerve fibre.[3] Research was interrupted by World War II but after resuming their experimental work in Plymouth, the pair published their theory in 1952. In the paper, they describe one of the earliest computational models [4] in biochemistry, that is the basis of most of the models used in Neurobiology during the following four decades. He continued to hold college and university posts in Cambridge until 1960, when he became head of the Department of Physiology at University College London. For his research, in 1963 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. In 1969 he was appointed to a Royal Society Research Professorship which he holds in the Department of Physiology at University College London.
He maintained up to his death his position as a fellow at Trinity College, Cambridge, teaching in physiology, natural sciences and medicine. [5]He was also a fellow of Imperial College London in 1980.[6]
From his experimental work with Hodgkin, Huxley developed a set of differential equations that provided a mathematical explanation for nerve impulses—the "action potential". This work provided the foundation for the all of the current work on voltage-sensitive membrane channels, which are responsible for the functioning of animal nervous systems. Quite separately, he developed the mathematical equations for the operation of myosin "cross-bridges" that generate the sliding forces between actin and myosin filaments, which cause the contraction of skeletal muscles. These equations presented an entirely new paradigm for understanding muscle contraction, which has been extended to provide our understanding of almost all of the movements produced by cells above the level of bacteria.

See also

Further reading

  • Huxley A.F. 1980. Reflections on muscle. The Sherrington Lectures XIV. Liverpool.

External links

References

  1. ^ GRO Register of Births: MAR 1918 1a 724 HAMPSTEAD - Andrew F. Huxley, mmn - Bruce
  2. ^ Anthony Tucker. "Sir Andrew Huxley | Science". The Guardian. Retrieved 2012-05-31.
  3. ^ A.L.Hodgkin & A.F. Huxley (1939) Action potentials recorded from inside a nerve fibre. Nature 144, 710-711.
  4. ^ one of the earliest computational models
  5. ^ The Master of Trinity at Trinity College, Cambridge
  6. ^ http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/aboutimperial/imperial_people/nobel_laureates

安德魯·赫胥黎爵士,OMFRS(Sir Andrew Fielding Huxley,1917年11月22日-2012年5月30日)出生於英國倫敦[1],是一位生理學家生物物理學家,與艾倫·勞埃德·霍奇金共同研究神經的動作電位,兩人因此與研究突觸約翰·卡魯·埃克爾斯共同獲得1963年的諾貝爾生理學或醫學獎
赫胥黎在1955年獲選成為皇家學會會員,並在1974年獲得騎士勳銜。此外,他也是赫胥黎家族的成員之一,父親是小說家里歐納德·赫胥黎(Leonard Huxley),祖父是19世紀的著名生物學家托馬斯·亨利·赫胥黎
赫胥黎在2012年5月30日於劍橋郡艾登布魯克斯醫院逝世,終年94歲。[2]

參考來源

  1. ^ GRO Register of Births: MAR 1918 1a 724 HAMPSTEAD - Andrew F. Huxley, mmn - Bruce
  2. ^ Elliott, Chris, "Nobel laureate Sir Andrew Huxley Dies", cambridge-news.co.uk, 3 June 2012.




Andrew Huxley

Sir Andrew Huxley, neurophysiologist, died on May 30th, aged 94


EUGENICS, these days, is a dirty word. But read the name “Huxley” and it is hard to believe there is not something to it. In the 19th century Thomas Henry Huxley was Darwin’s bulldog, biting the ankles of bishops who dared cleave to the literal truth of Genesis. Thomas’s descendants included Aldous, a noted novelist, and Sir Julian, another evolutionary biologist much given to smiting deviants from Darwinism. And that is not to mention Anthony, a botanist, and Francis, an anthropologist. None of them, though, outshone Sir Andrew Huxley, for it was he who solved one of the most important biological mysteries of all—how nerve cells work, and thus, at bottom, how brains do.

The link between electricity and life had been known for over a century when he became interested in it. The power of electricity to create a simulacrum of life in dead bodies, by causing their muscles to twitch, was a fairground trick. But the details were not clear. The young Andrew came into the problem through mechanics; a handy boy, with a well-loved Meccano set and a metal-turning lathe on which he made his own apparatus long into adulthood, he found that the only sort of life science that drew him was physiology, or how bodies worked.

In 1935 the shy young Huxley met Alan Hodgkin, a fellow student at Trinity College, Cambridge. The two were both interested in investigating nerves. They began with dead frogs, whose sciatic nerves had been stimulated to make their legs twitch by no less a scientist than Luigi Galvani, the first to look into the matter, in 1771.
Individual frog-nerve cells, though, are hard to get at and manipulate. Instead, in 1939 the two researchers exiled themselves to Plymouth, where the Marine Biological Association has a laboratory, and turned to the nerve cells of squid—a species that has what are known as giant axons.
The axon is the long protuberance from a nerve cell that connects it to the next cell in the circuit. The nerves that activate a squid’s jet-propelled escape mechanism have particularly big axons, allowing signals to travel at great speed. That also makes it easy to attach electrodes to various points along an axon, to track those signals.
This the two biologists did—the finest optical and microscopical work being left to Sir Andrew, who had a particular fondness for microscopes. Somewhat to his surprise, and much to his pleasure, as he put it later in his understated way, it all went more smoothly than he expected. And to cut a long story short, after regrouping once they had done their service during the second world war (Sir Andrew venturing into both gunnery and marriage) they were able to work out what was going on.
Their main finding was that a nerve impulse, now known as an action potential, is caused by the movement in opposite directions across the axon’s surface membrane of sodium and potassium ions. The ions inside the axon are held out of equilibrium with those outside it (there are too many potassium ions within, and too few sodium). As the action potential passes, special proteinaceous gates open in the cell’s membrane. The first of these to do so let sodium ions in. Once that has happened, a second set let potassium ions out. Then, when the action potential has passed, the ions are laboriously pumped back to where they once were, so that the cell is primed to respond again. But nothing actually travels the axon’s length except a wave of electrical potential.

Lights. Camera. Action potential
The seminal paper on the matter hit the presses in 1952. Messrs Hodgkin and Huxley thus beat that other famous biological double-act, Watson and Crick, by a year. That their paper is less well known now reflects that pair’s flair for publicity, as much as the relative importance of the work. Sir Andrew, in fact, often showed his strong opinions in wry smiles rather than words.

Honours nevertheless followed, as night follows day. A Nobel prize, shared with Hodgkin (and also with John Eccles, an Australian scientist) came in 1963, the year after Watson’s and Crick’s. The knighthood was somewhat delayed, until 1974. The British establishment, then as now, was dominated by arts men and could be a bit dense about the value of scientific advance.

The Order of Merit—the true prize of the British honours system, because it is limited to 24 living members and is in the personal gift of the monarch—came in 1983. Sir Andrew also followed his grandfather, Thomas Henry, as president of Britain’s main scientific academy, the Royal Society. The Huxleys are thus the only family to have provided two holders of that post. And he became master of Trinity, an institution regarded, at least by those who have attended it, as the pinnacle of British academic life. That was a post he hugely enjoyed. He did not even mind the master’s duty of officiating in chapel, since he was, he explained, not atheist but agnostic (a word usefully invented by his grandfather), and was “very conscious that there is no scientific explanation for the fact that we are conscious.”
He also liked to joke that his college had produced more Nobel prize-winners than France. That is a good story, but not actually true. Whether it will ever be true of the Huxleys remains to be seen.

網誌存檔